| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member |
2. The applicant requests reconsideration of his request that he be advanced on the retired list to the highest grade he satisfactorily held, i.e., pay grade E-6. He makes no additional statement.
3. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 24 April 2001 (docket number AR2001052882).
4. On 11 April 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) determined that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily in grade E-6 due to his general court-martial conviction for photographing a nude, under 16-year-old female, and indecent sexual acts and sodomy with that child. The AGDRB determined he served satisfactorily in grade E-5 for the purpose of computation of retired pay. However, because the AGDRB did not grant full relief, its determination was forwarded to this Board for consideration and was never forwarded to the U. S. Army Reserve Personnel Command for implementation.
5. On 24 April 2001, this Board concurred with the AGDRB that pay grade E-5 was the highest grade the applicant satisfactorily held while on active duty. However, it found that there was no basis for granting the applicant’s request apparently in the belief that the AGDRB’s action would be implemented. The end result was that no action to advance him to grade E-5 on the retired list was taken.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. This Board also concurs with the AGDRB that the applicant did not satisfactorily serve in pay grade E-6 as evidenced by his reduction by a general court-martial conviction but that he did serve satisfactorily in pay grade E-5.
2. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the applicant was advanced on the retired list in the rank and grade of Sergeant, E-5 after his active service plus his service on the retired list totaled 30 years and that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service pay to the applicant all retired pay due as a result of this correction.
2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
__gdp___ __tap___ __mhm___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
George D. Paxson
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001064029 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020221 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (GRANT) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 131.09 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068052C070402
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. On 1 October 1990, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be retired on 30 September 1991, in the rank and pay grade of SPC/E-4. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065101C070421
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 21 November 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) evaluated the applicant’s record to determine if he should be advanced to the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6 on the Retired List. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was reduced from SSG/E-6 to SGT/E-5 due to his own misconduct, as a result of accepting NJP for a 13 day AWOL offense.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060306C070421
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 4 October 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) evaluated the applicant’s record to determine if he should be advanced to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the Retired List. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he should be advanced to SFC/E-7 on the Retired List but after reviewing his overall record of service, the Board concludes it concurs with the AGDRB determination that his service as a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077845C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 15 August 1985, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP), for assaulting an NCO. On 20 August 2002, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) denied the applicant’s request to be advanced to the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6 on the Retired List.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071783C070403
It further confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SP4/E-4 on the date of his separation and that on the following day he was placed on the Retired List in that rank and pay grade. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was reduced from the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6 due to his own...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002082908C070215
The applicant submitted an application to the Army Grade Determination Board (AGRDB) requesting advancement on the Retired list to the pay grade of E-7. This law authorizes Reserve enlisted members of the Army to be placed on the Retired List in the highest enlisted grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily. The laws and regulations in effect at that time provided for his placement on the Retired List in the rank and pay grade he held on the date of his REFRAD, and for his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057713C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The DD Form 214 issued to and signed by the applicant on the date of his separation confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG/E-6) on the date of his separation. On 26 September 2001, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) denied the applicant’s request to be advanced to the rank and pay grade of SFC/E-7 on the Retired List.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076732C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 1 December 1969, the applicant submitted an Application for Voluntary Retirement (DA Form 2339) requesting that he be REFRAD for the purpose of retirement on 30 November 1970, in the rank and pay grade of SSG/E-6. The evidence of record confirms that the highest rank and pay grade the applicant attained while serving on active duty was SSG/E-6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075526C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The separation document issued to him on the date of his separation, 31 March 1987, confirms that he held the rank and pay grade of SGT/E-5 on the date of REFRAD. On 28 June 2002, the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) denied the applicant’s request for advancement on the Retired List.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075532C070403
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests...